World class scumbags.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
- Toto Has Moved!
- Cooling Nuuk
- Escape The Heat At Your Local Movie Theater
- Charles Butler Interview – May 2, 2016
- Massive Greenland Fraud Is Rapidly Growing
- More Detail On The NSIDC Disappearing Ice
- 1995 IPCC Report Showed No Troposphere Warming From 1958 To 1995
- More On The NSIDC Disappearing Ice
- Climate Hustle Today
- On The Air Monday
- NOAA Quadrupling Radiosonde Temperatures By Data Tampering
- Skiing Is A Thing Of The Past
- Alarmist Brains Depleted Of Oxygen
- Climate Scam Being Driven By Politicians/Actors/Journalists
- 1905 : Valdez, Alaska Relocated Due To Glacial Melting
- Today’s Climate Fraud Winners – Science News
- Most Influential Climate Denier On Twitter
- SCIENCE : 230 Years Of Blaming White Men For Climate Change
- Battling Climate Misinformation In Santa Fe
- 1906 : Belief In Climate Change Is Due To Defective Memories
- Oswald’s Rifle?
- The Arctic Is Ice Free – How Can Sea Ice Be Declining?
- Climate Hustle Next Monday – One Night Only
- The Surface Temperature Record Is A Farce
- NASA – Doubling Sea Level Rise By Data Tampering
Join 1,961 other subscribers
I feel bad for all the folks who diligently carried out their obligation to record the data for years and years, only to have somebody else change what they measured afterward. I would be severely pissed. Right wrong or otherwise, the data should stand.
Methinks you’ve ruffled some feathers.
Watch out, your IRS “audit-from-hell” is next…..
World class strawman argument. First, they repeat your claim, then they proceed to say why it supposedly “doesn’t matter” (when it really does anyway), rather than actually examine the validity of the claim.
Rather diminishes the value of their Pulitzer, and makes one wonder what other strawmen they’ve built.
Really enjoying your blog !
My daughter is a scientist in the bio chem area, so some of this tech talk really makes sense, my career was in elect eng …. now in my 70’s cannot believe the “Political slant to science these days” … maybe I have more time being retired to investigate things that normally would just been surface information with the work I was doing.
I tend to find Dr. Bill Wattenburg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Wattenburg quite informative on the nuclear issues and sometimes entering into ” Normal Climate Change ” talk radio …….
just read the article … posted from Steve D. — not a nice thing to do without keeping you in the loop ………….
Keep up the great work !
Wow. They completely ignored the fact that the data was edited without public announcement, or research detailing the individual station changes that “required” the adjustments. They ignored the fact that it isn’t just unlikely, it is entirely impossible, that EVERY station before 1960 happened to have recorded temperatures to high, and so needed to have the temperatures reduced, and every station after it recorded them to low, and so needed to have the temperatures raised. It assumed that scientists before the year 2000 had to be complete idiots, and some genius at NASA fixed 120 years of errors, from every temperature station in the entire United States. It also ignored the fact that these changes could easily be marked on the charts, or new charts could be created using sets of data taken at equivalent locations at similar times, providing continuity of the data comparisons. Instead of producing a scientifically valid and useful set of data that conforms to a basic scientific process, they quietly adjusted the data to produce what any person who reads the chart, would assume is an honest representation of the actual raw data measurements. That is dishonest at best, and potentially fraudulent. Lastly, by not including a data file on each station, and the adjustments to the data done for that station/state, then their changes can’t be verified by a peer review process. If the data can’t be directly replicated by a second source with all the adjustments and manipulations, the data isn’t peer reviewed and should not be published.
Powderslider–Great point. So is there a way to rouse the folks whose efforts and diligence over the years are now being ‘adjusted’? And by ‘rouse’ I mean pitchforks and torches marching on NOAA/NASA/the White House?
We just bought another hay fork and I am saving feathers…
I wonder if you will turn up on a Mars rover camera?
Next week PolitiFact will discover whether the IRS targeting of conservative groups was politically motivated by asking the IRS what they think.
The page hits on this blog will be going up though 😉
It’s quite telling that they have sicked an outfit named POLITI-fact to take on your statistical study. It kinda demonstrates what the alarmist clowns are all about. An argument about temperature data wouldn’t normally seem like the domain of some (left wing) outfit that critiques politics.
Poltifact? The organization that said the “lie of the year” was the Romney commercial that said Chrysler was going to make Jeeps in China? I guess since the “vehicles” are made in China, they are “Reeps”?
You are in good company – the honest ones.
Funny that the politifact does not allow comments. Obviously they are so sure of their “facts” they don’t need to listen to anyone. Gee that reminds me of a certain “scientific” discipline…
Politifact is staffed almost entirely by Democrats. Note they allow no rebuttals, or even comments.
Remember, these are the same geniuses who said Obama’s statements that “you can keep your plan” and “you can keep your doctor” were totally accurate. Oops.
Beyond worthless. Just another bunch of self-appointed left-wing deciders of what is true.
They are worse than that. Judas goats is a better name for them.
After all the deaths from fuel poverty in the UK because of the CAGW scam, anyone supporting the scam without doing due diligence, especially “opinion makers’ are Accomplices Before The Fact and have bloody hands.
And the ones that called the Ad about Chrysler building jeeps in China – the lie of the year. Until production started.
Re-reading that article, it’s even worse than I thought. The Politifarcers don’t even seem to realize that they are conflating two totally different points — the graph of adjustments, and the graph of missing station data. They quote Anthony as though he’s denying the former.
“Mark C. Serreze, professor of geography at the University of Colorado-Boulder, said no fabrication has taken place.”
Flat out factually incorrect. Not even NCDC denies they infill!
Hmmm Professor of Geography … is geography considered one of the ‘hard’ sciences?
Global Warming is a religion, on par with a mysterious pre Christian Roman religion called Mithras, which revolved around the clandestine ritual slaughter of bulls. The believers in Mithras were noted for their secret handshakes and initiation ceremonies.
I therefor find it odd that Little Al’s daddy, Al Gore sr. was a very successful Tennessee cattle rancher who conned….. I mean convinced people to invest in his limited partnership cattle ranching schemes. One of the marks… uh investors was a friend of mine and his tales of how Big Al got over on him and his fellow investors will leave you rolling on the floor. It seems that every time it looked like a dividend check was going to show up in the mail box that everyone of Big Al’s bulls needed heart bypass surgery or else the bull requested a sex change operation.
Evidently even rotten apples don’t fall far from the tree as Little Al’s own business practices proves.